Dialysis Modality Education Timing and Home Dialysis Uptake: A Quality Improvement Study
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Rationale & Objective Investigating the effect of a quality improvement intervention aimed at enhancing the choice of home dialysis among patients through improved educational sessions on dialysis modalities. Study Design A new referral protocol initiated on September 15, 2022, sought to direct patients with advanced kidney disease to modality education sessions. This protocol involved an updated referral form and process, requiring nephrologists to refer patients with an estimated glomerular filtration rate below 15mL/min/1.73m 2 or specified Kidney Failure Risk Equation scores to modality educators for education. The impact was measured by the uptake of the education and the choice of home dialysis by patients. Setting & Participants The study took place at Sunnybrook Health Sciences Centre in Toronto, Canada, involving 532 patients across 1,723 clinical encounters from October 2019 to June 2023. Predictor The intervention was predicted to lead to an increase in both the number of patients receiving modality education and those choosing home dialysis. Outcomes The primary outcome measured was the selection of home dialysis following modality education, with a secondary focus on the proportion of patients educated post intervention. Analytical Approach Statistical process charts were used for monitoring changes in education uptake and home dialysis selection rates following the intervention. Results After implementing the standardized referral system, the proportion of patients receiving modality education increased from 27.1%-56.7%. However, the rate of selecting home dialysis remained constant at 50.9%. Overall home dialysis prevalence at our center averaged 19.6%, remaining lower than the provincial average of 24.4% by the end of the study period. Limitations The study was limited to 1 center, without evaluating patient satisfaction or dissecting the complexity of educational content and delivery. Conclusions We succeeded in boosting education rates but failed to achieve higher home dialysis choice rates, possibly owing to the complexity involved in modality choices. We plan to further investigate the factors influencing patient choices during modality education to better promote home dialysis selection. Plain-Language Summary The study focused on whether teaching patients more about their dialysis options would encourage them to choose home dialysis. A new system was introduced at an academic hospital in Toronto, requiring doctors to refer patients with advanced kidney disease to educational sessions. The aim was to see if patients who learned more about dialysis would be more likely to manage their treatment at home. The result was more patients received these educational sessions, but this did not lead to more of them choosing home dialysis. Future research must investigate what other factors influence patients' decisions to consider dialysis treatments at home.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.013 | 0.018 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".